The existence of the human soul, is fundamental assumption shared by ALL religions. Disproving or proving it scientifically could result in the destruction of either religion of atheism. Where the soul is something that determines who we are that is independent of the human brain.

I think people should investigate the soul, it is probably the easiest part of religion to disprove/prove scientifically

If we have a soul, does this mean other animals like elephants and dolphins have souls? There are many animals capable of suffering, elephants can morn there dead and can recognized their remains. If they have no soul how is this complicated behavior must be created through biological 'artificial' intelligence. Then through induction via the processes of evolution it is possible our brains are simply several steps ahead of an elephants intelligence.

If you argue all animals have souls, you can argue backwards... what about ants which behave like they are scripted surely they MUST have no soul? As soon as you find a life form with no soul it is possible to argue animals which apparently have souls may actually have a biological intelligence.

I am sure there are more points that can argue either way, perhaps with some scientific backing rather than being completely argumentative.

Do you think we have some sort of soul which determines who we are that is independent of the brain?

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:Do you think we have some sort of soul which determines who we are that is independent of the brain?

Err, no.

If you say you have a "soul", what are you trying to say? For a religious person it might be "morality" or "conscience", or for another it might mean "your eternal essence that can go to the afterlife" or some other BS like that. If you didn't have one, would your life go differently to if you did have one? What would it "do" exactly?

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:Disproving or proving it scientifically could result in the destruction of either religion of atheism.

What would there be to prove? Religion is based on things that specifically cannot be studied or researched (or quickly adapts itself to compensate for a lack of logic, e.g. 'faith'). Science is based on things that can be observed, recorded, calculated. The whole point of religion is that it's supposed to make you go "ooh wow, here's something we can't explain so let's believe in magic". Apples and oranges.

Anyway, as long as there are those willing to brainwash their children daily (as well as the kids of others) there will be believers. As long as there are those that require the tiniest shred of evidence before believing what they're told there will be atheists.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:There are many animals capable of suffering, elephants can morn there dead and can recognized their remains. If they have no soul how is this complicated behavior must be created through biological 'artificial' intelligence.

Why are you so surprised that other animals have this empathy? After all, if they're capable of complex social structures and interactions, the ability to feel loss hardly seems incredible.

We can already explain this kind of thing without inventing an "invisible mystical thingy" to get rid of any intelligent speculation. There's already more than enough of that.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:The existence of the human soul, is fundamental assumption shared by ALL religions.

No, it's not. By the way, that English needs some work.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:Disproving or proving it scientifically could result in the destruction of either religion of atheism.

No, it wouldn't. Barring the fact that the existence of the soul is impossible to prove, religions would go along believing (either flat out ignoring it or calling the scientific evidence invalid), and existence of the soul wouldn't be relevant to atheism anyway.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:Where the soul is something that determines who we are that is independent of the human brain.

Horrible definition. Penis size often determines who someone is, and it happens to be independent of the human brain (in fact, some say it functions as a second human brain).

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:I think people should investigate the soul

Investigate something invisible and unmeasurable?

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:it is probably the easiest part of religion to disprove/prove scientifically

This is false. Whereas we can actually disprove parts of the bible, we can not prove the soul.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:If we have a soul, does this mean other animals like elephants and dolphins have souls?

I can't speak for every religion, but I know in Christianity, animals have no souls.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:There are many animals capable of suffering, elephants can morn there dead and can recognized their remains.

Virtually every animal can recognize the remains of other animals. There are these things called "senses" that provide information about the world. Sight and smell are some big ones.

Also, what does it mean to be "capable of suffering"? I can certainly inflict harm upon any animal, so naturally any animal is capable of suffering.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:If they have no soul how is this complicated behavior must be created through biological 'artificial' intelligence. Then through induction via the processes of evolution it is possible our brains are simply several steps ahead of an elephants intelligence.

If the soul were to exist, it would not control behavior anyway. As you stated, through evolution our brains are more developed. Also, how can you claim biological intelligence is artificial, when artificial intelligence is any intelligence that is, by definition, not biological?

Furthermore, the behavior you listed is certainly not complicated. Mourning of the dead has an evolutionary function.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:If you argue all animals have souls, you can argue backwards... what about ants which behave like they are scripted surely they MUST have no soul?

Once again, even if the soul were real it is not the brain. Regardless, ants do not behave like they are scripted. When a human goes to work for 8 hours a day, doing the same thing they do every other day, are they "scripted"? Keep in mind, insects are also a special case - insects all work together for the benefit of their collective colony. In fact, you can even think of the ant colony itself as one animal.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:As soon as you find a life form with no soul it is possible to argue animals which apparently have souls may actually have a biological intelligence.

Every living, intelligent thing has biological intelligence.

Also, once again, it is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of the soul.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:I am sure there are more points that can argue either way, perhaps with some scientific backing rather than being completely argumentative.

You are correct in that these arguments are lacking scientific backing.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:Do you think we have some sort of soul which determines who we are that is independent of the brain?

I don't think so. The essence of what people call a soul is most likely a set of reactions learned by our brains over our lifetime which determines what kind of people we are. I'm no Neurologist, so I can't go into detail, but that's the gist of what I believe.

The same thing happens in nearly every biological life-form. However, Humans are self aware to the point where we don't consciously know what we subconsciously know. We can also communicate with each other. Because of these two things, we created the idea of a soul, and have the ability to debate it.

It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votesinsomaniacal.blog.com

Well i guess they are the main religions that most people follow, basically any religion which involves and afterlife will be destroyed... that pretty much all religions i guess lol.

Anyway it is possible to disprove the human soul by proving human behavior (conclusively) is as a result of biological processes. If we could understand exactly how the brain works.. this would indirectly disprove the concept of the soul.

Well i guess they are the main religions that most people follow, basically any religion which involves and afterlife will be destroyed... that pretty much all religions i guess lol.

So you know the name of two or three religions, and you guess that you know each and every one of them. Congrats.

UNSC_AI8085 wrote:Anyway it is possible to disprove the human soul by proving human behavior (conclusively) is as a result of biological processes. If we could understand exactly how the brain works.. this would indirectly disprove the concept of the soul.

Really? Are you so sure about that? So you are sure that the concious of a human (that's being created by the billions of connected neurons in the brain, according to the complexity theories - which is SCIENCE) is not what religions call "soul"?Btw, you should read up on modern physics, you'll be suprised how your materialistic thoughts don't stand according to academic physics.